Dave31

I thought Rene Salm was a mythicist all this time according to his website until his website was given a closer look:

Rene Salm is not a mythicist

Rene Salm admits on his own website that he is a "semi-mythicist" and a "euhemerist" on his "about" page:

Rene Salm:

Rene Salm:

Apparently, Salm beleives that John the Baptist was the 'real Jesus.'

What's up with that?

:huh:

ApostateAbe

I don't think that is significantly different from a full-blown mythicist. Mythicists believe that either a person or a set of people was responsible for the beginning of Christianity but not Jesus of Nazareth. Definitions are not so relevant, anyhow. When someone is deeply entrenched in the mythicist camp and takes on all the typical qualities of mythicists, that is sufficient to call him or her a mythicist.

Dave31

No, that's false. Rene Salm admits that he is an "euhemerist." That is a significant distinction between mythicists and those who believe that Jesus was based on a some sort of historical character i.e. "euhemerism."

And yes, definitions absolutely do matter.

stephan huller

I don't understand the surprise. Are there people who actually believe there is absolutely no connection with reality in this 'myth' concept? So no Jesus, no crucifixion, no apostles, no Church, no nothing - just a 'myth'? No shit? Really?

ApostateAbe

Yeah, maybe Rene Salm thinks there is a significant distinction between mythicism and what he believes because a bunch of mythicists don't give any alternative history of the beginning of Christianity any more than a passing thought. Their primary mode of thinking is skepticism of claims by religion.

Vorkosigan

Stephen, these events took place is some cosmic Otherwhen. The stories in the gospels are all fictions created out of various other texts. I don't know anyone who thinks the Church was a myth, and everyone accepts the existence of some of the individuals named as important early Christian figures.

Toto

But if the person who inspired early Christianity has nothing in common with the gospel character Jesus of Nazareth, then the difference between a mythicist and Rene Salm seems insignficant.

Are you trying to set up an orthodox creed for mythicism? Have you learned nothing from Christian history?

Chili

He just was in Luke and John.

Chili

Even if all is allegory there still must be a truth behind the allegory. Call this fiction if you like, but if it can be duplicated by believers is it then still fiction?

Sheshbazzar

Yes. No shit. Really. No Jesus. No crucifixion. No apostles.

I do allow that the 'church' arrived on the scene around sixty years latter and began cooking up a lot of shit in an attempt to legitimatize itself.

.